517
518
519

Red Pill TheoryDon't just make her do what you want. Make her want to. (self.TheRedPill)

submitted by TRP VanguardArchwinger

I made a comment last night in the married Red Pill sub that I really think ought to be elaborated on here, because it’s something that doesn’t always get discussed head on, and sometimes gets lost among other points.

When we talk about interactions with women and all of the things we employ – raising our value (physically, financially, socially), implementing “game,” implementing “dread game,” and so forth – the typical end result is to get a woman to do what we want. Usually sex or some other behavior that demonstrates submission to our leadership. That’s a win, right? That’s validating. When a woman does what we want due to who we are, what we’re like, and how we behaved, we won, right? Honestly, I think that’s a little incorrect. Not entirely wrong, mind you. Just kind of like viewing things when the camera lens is out of focus.

The goal is not for women do what we want. The goal is for women to want what we want.

It’s a subtle difference, but a very important one.

If you pay a prostitute for sex, then you got a woman to do what you wanted, didn’t you? Not really, because it wasn’t sex that you wanted. It wasn’t even free sex that you wanted. It was desire. You didn’t want sex, itself. At least not only sex. You wanted a woman to want to have sex with you. Because that’s good sex. That’s validating.

The same is true if we swap out legal tender for different kinds of currency. If your girlfriend sucks and you attempt to try out some dread game and, whoops, you don’t have a mind for subtleties or critical reading and accidentally blackmail the living fuck out of her, she might be desperately afraid you’re going to dump her and kick her out of your apartment and on to the street. She might even fuck you out of fear to avoid that fate. Now you have a woman trying to manipulate you with sex, just like you manipulated her into sex. Neither one of you is happy or satisfied. The sex probably sucks, too.

Likewise, if a woman is nagging the hell out of you and being a generally disrespectful bitch, and you attempt to withdraw emotionally, and whoops, you accidentally become a raging, threatening, pissy asshole, your woman might think, “Shit, I just wanted him to leave the toilet seat down. Why is he acting like this? I don’t want to deal with this any more, so I’ll just shut up.” She might even fuck you just to calm you down. Once again, you have a woman trying to manipulate you with sex, just like you manipulated her into sex. You’re both unhappy and unsatisfied. And the sex sucks.

We don’t just want our women to do what we want. We want them to want what we want. And that’s a lot harder.

A woman will submit to you when you’re a man worth submitting to. She will ride you all night long and let you plow her like a caveman if you’re a man worth fucking. She will let you father her children, lead her family, plan all of your dates, handle all of your affairs, and trust in your judgment, but only if you’re a man worthy of her trust. If you’re a man who actually has worthwhile judgment. She’s not going to hand the reins of her life to just anybody, and especially not the reins of her children’s lives. You have to be worth a shit. But if you’re worth a shit, you might have a dozen women lining up to turn their lives over to you, and all you have to do is say yes.

When we proudly declare “AWALT” (All [or at least mostly all] Women Are Like That), this is usually something we say in anger, when we’re talking about a woman’s propensity for selfishness, evil, and general disrespectful cunt bitch behavior. But AWALT works the other way, too. If you’re a man worth fucking, a man worth following, and a man worth giving your life to, women won’t just do what you want – they’ll want to do what you want. Your happiness will matter to them, and they’ll want to please you.  [Mostly] All Women Are Like That, too.


[–]ThirdLegGuy 188 points189 points  (14 children)

A woman will submit to you when you’re a man worth submitting to. She will ride you all night long and let you plow her like a caveman if you’re a man worth fucking. She will let you father her children, lead her family, plan all of your dates, handle all of your affairs, and trust in your judgment, but only if you’re a man worthy of her trust. If you’re a man who actually has worthwhile judgment. She’s not going to hand the reins of her life to just anybody, and especially not the reins of her children’s lives. You have to be worth a shit. But if you’re worth a shit, you might have a dozen women lining up to turn their lives over to you, and all you have to do is say yes.

And here comes the understanding that if you're perfectly fine doing all this stuff by yourself - turns out you're so complete that you don't need a woman in your life - save for sex, emotional comfort (if she's capable of providing it) and children.

There is a fun saying regarding banks: "A bank will lend you money if you prove you don't need it." You can paraphrase it this way:

"A woman will submit to you if you prove you don't need her."

[–]DoctorWelch 48 points48 points [recovered]

Great post. There is so much hate for marriage in this sub, and rightfully so, that I think there is a tendency to miss some really important parts of LTR game such as this very subtle thing you pointed out.

People often use AWALT as a negative thing, but it doesn't have to be if we know how to use it. Whether it is to spin plates or shape a decent women into following us, taking advantage of this knowledge is the essence of TRP.

[–][deleted] 36 points37 points  (3 children)

You wanted a woman to want to have sex with you. Because that’s good sex. That’s validating.

This is exactly the conclusion I reached earlier today. When I was in beta mode I wanted "sex with emotional connection" rather than "hollow casual sex". I wanted to be needed, emotionally, and have that expressed in sexual terms, thinking this was the pinnacle of open, vulnerable, evolved human feeling. What I've come to realise is that this was actually a deficiency in me - I was basically just projecting my neediness on to others, and expecting them to be needy and broken in the same way I was (still am, a bit, but I'm working on it).

That didn't work out so well for me, unsurprisingly - two needy people together is always ultimately a clusterfuck. Two strong people, who don't actually need each other, but who choose, and actively desire each other (at least at the time, desire is a fickle thing) are a far more mature and skillful arrangement. And it is validating, at least for men. Knowing you are strong and desirable in yourself is a far better validation rush than being a needy bitch and convincing someone else to give you what you (think you) need. Even when it works for a while, which it basically never does.

This thinking model also explains oneitis fairly neatly. It's the difference between "OMG she's so special I neeeeed her, but she doesn't want me and I'm going to spin in an emotional pain cycle and beg and plead until she gives me what I want (or get over it when that approach inevitably doesn't work)" and "I'm good, I'm strong, I'm worth having and wanting, and I'm going to pursue what I want and get it". You can still desire the other person of course, but if they don't really want you back then meh, someone else will. Their loss.

It's taken a while but I think I get it now. Thanks for taking this to the next level.